Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Poll

Which version of the song sounds better? 1 or 2

1 sounds better
9 (60%)
2 sounds better
4 (26.7%)
they sound about the same
2 (13.3%)

Total Members Voted: 15

Author Topic: Nbox/CMR Comp  (Read 23170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sparkey

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4056
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2010, 01:32:25 PM »
I can't download the file.....boo....

Did you Click Link, enter 4-digit code, wait 45 seconds, and click on "Regular Download", which replaces the timer?



Still can't seem to get it to work...I have to say I prefer sendspace.com
#Generalstrike for president in 2024

Offline yug du nord

  • ...til things never seen seem familiar…
  • Trade Count: (56)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5533
  • made with natural flavor
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2010, 01:34:56 PM »
My first impression....

Both sound great.
#1 seems fuller (more bottom end)....  maybe a little more "open" sounding.
#2 seems a little thinner than #1.

The high ends sound similar to me. 

Did you both use the same "wind screens"?
Were both sets of mics run approx. in the same config and the same height?
I re-read the first post which usually helps......

The biggest difference that I could tell initially was the "fuller" sound of #1.
Thanks.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 01:42:38 PM by uncleyug »
.....got a blank space where my mind should be.....

Offline edtyre

  • Trade Count: (85)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
  • Gender: Male
  • Team Philly " No Excuses, Just Tapes"
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2010, 01:42:52 PM »
Did you both use the same "wind screens"?
Were both sets of mics run approx. in the same config and the same height?

No windscreens (low pro) , same config. I'm a few inches taller than Nicky.
So height is pretty close, only inches difference.
music>mics>pre>recorder

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2010, 01:45:51 PM »
I can't download the file.....boo....

Did you Click Link, enter 4-digit code, wait 45 seconds, and click on "Regular Download", which replaces the timer?



Still can't seem to get it to work...I have to say I prefer sendspace.com

I have both Internet Explorer and Firefox set up as webbrowsers on my machine.  Alotta times if I have probs like this and I'm browsing with one of the two, I'll try the other webbrowser and the problem will resolve itself.  No clue if that will help you but perhaps worth a try.

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2010, 01:47:13 PM »
Did you both use the same "wind screens"?
Were both sets of mics run approx. in the same config and the same height?

... only inches difference.

You know what SHE says about a few extra inches... ;D

(you knew someone had to say it)

Offline yug du nord

  • ...til things never seen seem familiar…
  • Trade Count: (56)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5533
  • made with natural flavor
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #20 on: July 28, 2010, 01:53:07 PM »
After another listen......  I was mistaken about the highs sounding the same.....  #2 seems a little more up front/harsh in the high end.  #1 seems smoother in general.  I'm in one of these camps, so I'm trying to be subjective without bummin my own trip....  but I think I prefer #1.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2010, 01:57:53 PM by uncleyug »
.....got a blank space where my mind should be.....

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #21 on: July 28, 2010, 02:33:19 PM »
Did you both use the same "wind screens"?
Were both sets of mics run approx. in the same config and the same height?

... only inches difference.

Sometimes that's a really big deal, other times not.  It really depends on what's in front, etc.

I could be mistaken on this, but it kinda looks like one of these recordings is out of phase.  Anyone else looked that closely?

Offline tedyun

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 456
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #22 on: July 28, 2010, 03:37:00 PM »
Went with #1. Much fuller bottom end. I'm surprised how different they sound. I usually can't tell in these comps  :laugh:
Mics: B&K 4011, Schoeps MK5 (Nbobs, Naiant PFA), Busman BSC-1 (K11/K21/K31/K41 caps), Church CA-14 (o, c), Church CAFS, Core Sound Binaurals
Pre: EAA PSP-2,  Lunatec V3, Nbox-Platinum, Church CA-9200
ADC: Mytek 192 ADC, Oade Mod SBM-1
Rec: Oade Supermod PMD-661, Tascam DR60D, M-Audio MicroTrack II, Korg MR-1 (32GB SSD mod); Sony PCM-M10, Edirol R09HR; iRiver HP-120
Photo: Canon 5D3, Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8, Canon EF 35mm f1.4L Canon EF 24-70 f2.8L MkI, Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS MkI, Canon EF 50 mm f1.4, Canon EF 50 f1.2L, Canon EF 300 f/4L IS, Canon EF 100-400 f4-5.6L IS MkI
Video: Canon HF100

Offline edtyre

  • Trade Count: (85)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
  • Gender: Male
  • Team Philly " No Excuses, Just Tapes"
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #23 on: July 28, 2010, 03:58:53 PM »
#1=nbox
#2=cmr

My impression was that the nbox sounded better as well.

This is all very non-scientific. We weren't in the exact same spot (next to each other)
we both had a little different gain settings.
music>mics>pre>recorder

Offline edtyre

  • Trade Count: (85)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
  • Gender: Male
  • Team Philly " No Excuses, Just Tapes"
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #24 on: July 28, 2010, 04:02:26 PM »
I could be mistaken on this, but it kinda looks like one of these recordings is out of phase.  Anyone else looked that closely?

Which one?
music>mics>pre>recorder

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #25 on: July 28, 2010, 04:33:45 PM »
I could be mistaken on this, but it kinda looks like one of these recordings is out of phase.  Anyone else looked that closely?

Which one?

Not sure which one, it kinda looks like #2.  It's one thing to notice that one of them might be inverted, but more tricky to identify which one it is.    The phase would not account for the harshness in the highs I heard with #2.

So in terms of what I heard and voted...  I found the highs on #2 somewhat harsh and grating.    When comparing sources, I tend to focus on the negatives that bother me, and that really jumped out.  The bass was different, but that didn't matter given the harshness I perceived.

In a comp, people tend to prefer the louder source.  So it is odd that so many of us actually prefered #1, when it was the more quiet source.   Btw, as I dug deeper I found some of the differences in peak levels were actually due to one recordist being closer to a clapper.

Beyond my concerns about phase and levels, the waveforms here were surprisingly very different.  Take a close look.   I was using audacity, which I really don't like.   It'd be interesting to compare them in wavelab (which I'm more comfortable in), but I think I'd see the same differences.

And again, though I did reluctantly vote, it seems there were some issues with this comp that preclude me from judging the gear.   I did expect the tinybox/cmr to do better than this.  I had no idea which source was which.  I'm really surprised by what I heard, and wonder what is up.  I know John is quite rigorous in his design engineering, but I don't recall reading many posts about listening tests.  Those weren't the mk4's that were in the toilet? :P

So, I don't know.. The levels were different, the phase may be out on one, the waves look a little funky.  More investigation is needed.  tinybox issue?  cmr issue?

Also, as an aside, I still feel the m10 needs more serious testing.  Someone with a great and well known preamp like the v3 should do a test where the v3 gain is varied along with the m10 gain.  We really need to know if the m10 sounds funky at certain gain settings.  Though I would not expect 4 vs. 5 to sound all that different.  Also, we need to know how hot the m10 should be run, and what sounds best (or if there is even any difference).  Those types of tests can be done at home.  Boring stuff, but important.

Offline NOLAfishwater

  • is not taping much these days
  • Trade Count: (72)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6344
  • Gender: Male
  • I LIKE FISHIN
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #26 on: July 28, 2010, 04:59:20 PM »
the only true comp will be on a stand in same configuration with same recorder

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #27 on: July 28, 2010, 05:51:48 PM »
Forgot one thing... 48volts polarization = spitty highs :P

Offline yug du nord

  • ...til things never seen seem familiar…
  • Trade Count: (56)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5533
  • made with natural flavor
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #28 on: July 28, 2010, 06:00:14 PM »
What is the main usage of CMR's in the industry??
.....got a blank space where my mind should be.....

Offline schoepsnbox

  • Trade Count: (46)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 439
  • Gender: Male
  • Nbox...........Zero's and One's
Re: Nbox/CMR Comp
« Reply #29 on: July 29, 2010, 11:49:12 PM »
I wired up the cmrs up for ed...And while I must admit the cmrs are an appealing setup, they seem to have limitations.
This gave me the opportunity to take a voltage reading and I only got a voltage reading of 9.3volts to polarize the capsule..so the myth of the larger capsule ends containing the goods to step up the voltage to 48-60 volts has been busted IMO..
Regardless of the preamp/recorder used with these cmrs the characteristics of the capsule suffer due to lower polarization voltage..again all IMO.  YMMV

« Last Edit: July 30, 2010, 12:03:04 AM by schoepsnbox »

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.082 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF